Let's not blame the slow growth of the American economy on oil prices. What America needs is a kick in the pants. The elite, that is those in the know with the bucks, have to start investing in creating real jobs for all Americans. It is simple as that.
Government policies ands regulations MUST stimulate this growth.
Governments must quit being self-serving and choose the path of lowering the cost of their services. Let's be more productive by reducing all waste. Reduce-reuse-recycle. Understand????

In 2008 the US should have stimulated the US economy to avert a sharp slowdown and crash.

By 2009 the US should have stopped stimulus and should have slowly raised interest rates, while the rest of the world should have lowered their interest rates aggressively. The US should have closed its trade deficit and cut war spending, while possibly raising taxes in 2010. The dollar should have strengthened.

By 2011 there should have been an improvement in the US budget deficit and trade deficit. The poor run - companies would have been cleared from the system slowly and by 2012 the US could have very slowly started to lower its interest rates again while the rest of the world could have slowly raised their rates again. This process could have been repeated so that the rest of the world support the US with their demand ( lower interest rates ).

Doesn’t it seem like there is something fundamentally wrong with a monetary and financial system that fails to meet the needs of a large percentage of its citizen’s basic needs such as jobs and food? Currently there is plenty of pent up demand for basic goods and services and although resources will always be of a finite quantity, there are still ample resources in the world to supply the pent up demand for these resources.

The current situation brings forth a question that is as old as civilization. What is the best way to distribute goods and services to the world. Capitalism and free markets is a system embraced by much of the world but its unplanned consequences and waste of resources is not terribly efficient. Pure socialism is probably a more efficient way to use resources because of its planned structure that eliminates much of the wasted resources of capitalism. The shortfall of planned socialism is that even though it may be well intentioned, it is nearly impossible for the planners to actually recognize and quickly react to the needs of all its citizens.
.
In reality, pure capitalism and pure socialism do not exist. Free markets are taxed and manipulated by governments and large corporations. Socialism fosters black markets that behave as free markets. Also, socialistic entities often need to enter in to free markets to procure resources not available within the boundaries of their system, and to trade their own surpluses. Both systems appear to be greatly influenced by politics.

The point is that both systems have their pitfalls and advantages and that neither system, except in name actually resembles the ideal concept. We need to recognize what our economy needs and take action. In doing so, we should not get stymied by terms like socialistic and capitalistic because in practice both ideals have areas in an economy where concepts of one system or the other are useful. We should not be overly concerned about controlled trade or the creation of socialistic systems to distribute things like power, health care, or transportation systems. When economies are sluggish, as we have seen over the past 4 year, a strong fiscal policy seems prudent. Sluggish economies generally create lower prices, isn’t that a good time for our government to purchase goods and services for social benefit?

Firstly, the choices here are NOT between "capitalism" and "socialism". Where you opine as to "socialism", you're tilting at a windmill that has long since fallen completely to the ground and beaten eaten away by rot. The only "socialist" economies left around are Cuba (where even Fidel has admitted, "socialism doesn't even work for us! [why would I wish to export it to others]", and North Korea, where petty potentates starve their people, beg for handouts from the WFP, and launch missiles fruitlessly at the sea, all whilst bragging what a "socialist paradise" they live in.

Today's economies everywhere in the world are firmly rooted in the capitalist method. The differences between them are far less than between modern economies and their agricultural/pastoral forbearers.

Rather than throw up straw men like this, in order to find a footing for your shallow theory that "austerity and self-reliance are best", just take a look at today's Europe, where an excess of that typically Germanic concept of "Pflicht" [duty] has caused the ECB and the European Commission to put the kibosh on any stimulus to Europe's economies and where "austerity" in the Austrian model is rapidly bringing about a severe recession, unnecessary bankruptcies, damaging economic losses, ever-widening public resentment, and a general distaste for the (innocently) capitalist basis of modern economics.

The problem, rather, is only the silly notion that one can save oneself into a fortune by reducing government expenditures and raising taxes in a time of economic decline. Such measures are "procyclical" and destined to bring about undue hardship. These measures were tried in the period between 1929 and 1933 in the US, and they brought about the worst ever economic collapse, here. They're being tried again in Europe, precisely because the Europeans have such a short memory. They are already failing to bring about the promised improvements.

Time to jettison austerity and to return to the standard and correct application of Keynesian economics!

Maybe the weak recovery is the result of bad to ill timed fiscal, regulatory and tax policies by the present administration. Businesses do not freely hire and massively invest when they are ritually denounced as greedy and irresponsible by the current administration and its surrogates. The investment shy business community knows that massive tax increases and massive health care levies are inevitable and is cutting back expansion plans rationally with that probable future. Why hire and invest if you will be punished for doing do?

Wall Street time and time again continues to demonstrate a tight federal regulation is required of the financial industry.

A country without a conservative, sound monetary system can not support a viable economy. Our monetary system is a creation of our federal government. It should be well protected by the federal government and those who wish to abuse the system should be eliminated from it.

Your less than well reasoned comparisons of successful profit making businesses with drug lords explains why "progressives" love the poor but despise those who might create jobs so the once poor won't need the entitlement state for all their needs. The last thing working people and those who WANT to work need is advocates and supporters like yourself!

The Fed needs to stop trying to prop up wages and asset prices by inflating the dollar. The Federal government needs to cut spending until revenues exceed expenditures. US consumers need to spend less and save more. Any sentient adult recognizes that this is the only way to steer the US economy back onto a course of sustainable growth. Unfortunately, the US these days appears to lack a quorum of sentient adults.

Tell the sentient adults at the Fed if you can find any that manipulating the economy to ride on consumer spending when we need to save more. If we save, the Fed will screw it in order to boost spending. After all, big finance needs fodder for their CDS instruments.

Imagine if every time you opened your— is not like this mouth someone heckled you? That's what President Obama's top adviser David Axelrod faced at a Boston press conference this week. Mitt Romney staffers drove from their headquarters across town to shout him down. Something like this has been happening to the president this election. When he tries to explain why he should be re-elected, the economy opens its mouth and drowns him out. On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced thatonly 69,000 jobs had been created in May, well shy of the roughly 140,000 required to sustain minimum economic health. The numbers for previous months were also revised downward, and the unemployment rate ticked up to 8.2 percent. If people lock in their feelings about the economy six months before an election, as so many political strategists say, then the president is in bad shape. We're five months away from Election Day. In some states like Ohio and Florida voting starts four months from now. Though there are some positive signs in the economy—consumer confidence was up last month, so was consumer spending, construction was up, and manufacturing continues to rise—there is no evidence that anything is going to happen that will be dramatic enough to break people out of their funk in which they think the country is heading in the wrong direction and they don’t approve of the job the president has done handling economic issues. Since these latest warning signs come after a period of optimism, even if the economy does improve, voters might fear that the clouds will come back again. This is not all the president’s woes, not by a longshot. The crisis over the euro is getting worse. American political types are paying attention to the recall election in Wisconsin next week, but the more salient one might be the June 17 election in Greece, which could set off another global economic panic. The European Central Bank president, distraught at trying to get 17 countries to act in concert, is sounding the alarm. A failure in Europe would further depress the U.S. economy by shrinking the customer base for American goods, spooking the stock market,and weakening U.S. banks tied to the global market.What would you look at first, leaders, politicians, yourself as the exchequer who can recreate the good economy? When I think of this I am sure all are tying to do something but what? that is what we miss. The problem ell defined is half solved but here we have no half empty half full theory or Rambo like man macho to come and help. We depend on the graphs and chart those are drawn by all. USA has messed up the economy the end. I thank you Firozali A.Mulla DBA and we were too slow to re-act.

Obama - pushed into the drivers seat by Hollywood celebrities and Europen support, has turned out to be perhaps the absolute worst US President in history. From an astounding failure in foreign and domestic policy, his only claim to any milestone "success" of his presidency is to take credit, ad nauseam if I may add, for shooting the brains out of a 78 year old unarmed man, once on the payroll of the CIA, who turned maverick and managed to orgainse a dastardly deed - all from a cave far within the mountains of Afghanistan using nothing more than a satellite telephone and a solar powered pc without even an internet connection. Good grief!

Lol, firstly, George W Bush was objectively much worse. Cutting taxes twice while waging 2 unfunded wars (and one of which, Iraq, was both pointless and counterproductive). Changing scientific reports (changing the FACTS) to support his world view. Torture. Promoting the "ownership society" that led to the housing bust. Running off most of our prospective allies around the world with his "yer with us or agin' us" attitude. The list goes on, and on...

Our current economic problems can be laid at the feet of Mr. Obama's predicessors George W Bush and Bill Clinton (with a smattering of Reagan era deregulation). And Congress of course (esp. Phil Graham pushing an end to Glass-Stegall) with their rampant corruption.

I see you're long on unsupported BS and short on actual facts... care to back up your highly biased rant? Btw, I think Obama'd hold up getting a health care law signed (even as weak as it is, it's at least a first step in the right direction - single payer, no profit motive healthcare should be the eventual goal.

valwayne: there you go fingerpointing & spouting mindless partizan rhetoric, all over again! You right wingnuts need to wake up & face the grim facts, before it destroys your nation. Passing the buck & looking for fall guys, won't get you anywhere but deeper in debt. Wise up!

After nearly 4 years of Obama the U.S. has the worst long term UNEMPLOYMENT since the Great Depression. The lowest percentage of the American people working since 1981, and the longest period of UNEMPLOYMENT over 8% since the Great Depression. The most recent economic report shows a U.S. economy likely going back into recession with UNEMPLOYMENT shooting back up. Obama's historic anti-business, anti-domestic energy, massive growth in Government, and nation destroying debt policies have inflicted terrible damage on the economy, and now that his spending & debt bubble is losing air we can see just how much damage Obama's failed Presidency has inflicted. Nov can't come soon enough for the U.S. to reject Obama's nightmare failed Presidency so we can get the nation back on the road to recovery, growth, and jobs!

Under Obama's administration the government has been shedding jobs every month up until now (which the article talks about), there has been more drilling than under Bush administration, the debt was built up mostly thanks to policies of the previous administration that left no cushion for emergency spending during the recession. So I'm not exactly sure where you get your information.
True, the economy has not been performing very well since the end of recession, but there is a whole slew of factors that are responsible for it and many of them are outside of the control of the president and the administration. Also, almost any initiatives that Obama has tried to put through get blocked by the party that has moved too far to the right for its own good and the good of the country.

We are seeing the effects of an economy that was struggling in the absence of bubbles that papered-over its true performance. The economy has only grown 1% annually for the past decade, excluding bubbles. We need 3% growth to generate enough jobs with our growing population (Okun's Law).

Homeowners are deeply in debt, as their primary asset, their home, has declined in value by 30%. Banks are barely solvent and the "too big to fail" problem remains. Our national debt is on an unsustainable path.

So what do we do? The experts have spoken, only we've been caught in a "this or that" trap instead of a "this and that" response.

1) Mortgage principal debt write downs, advocated by dozens of economists across the spectrum. This will free up consumers to start spending again, as paying down debt is a drag on the economy.

2) Short-term stimulus spending, advocated most loudly by Krugman, as we have an aggregate demand shortfall. This is a band-aid, not a solution, but the Left argues it's necessary. Give them the benefit of the doubt, as a few years of stimulus isn't that big a deal (we spend $700 billion annually on defense; the last stimulus was about $300 billion annually). This time, let's build some assets we can benefit from for a long time, like infrastructure and nuclear plants.

3) Long-term austerity, meaning action today to bend the curve on expenses in the future. Examples include raising the retirement age, reducing cost of living adjustments in pensions, forgiving the debts of doctors and nurses who stay in the profession ten years to offset a huge projected shortfall in their profession, etc.

4) Structural reforms: We have off-shored a lot of jobs, let's say 5-10 million jobs if our goods trade deficit is $650 billion. It is not a coincidence that the trade deficit and housing bubble peaked concurrently, as by definition a trade deficit must be borrowed; this huge capital inflow drove down interest rates. We can also put anyone not getting their high school diploma into a military-style program until they graduate and divert some funds from defense to paying for college educations.

5) Use taxing strategies with the most "bang for the buck" to get the most economic boost with the least impact on the deficit. For example, we could let the Bush income tax cuts expire while lowering the payroll tax rate, as the latter has a much more stimulative effect according to multiple studies summarized by the CBO.

Do it all, the "austerity vs. stimulus" debate is a false choice. The candidate that puts ideology aside, identifies the root causes, and formulates a logical response deserves the job.

America's greatest strength -- the ability to create successful new entrepreneurial ventures, remains woefully under-tapped by the present American government, which continues to spend, spend, spend, and borrow, borrow, borrow, and hand out free money to those who are not working, rather than to those who might put them to work.

Which use of $100,000 has a higher likelihood of creating sustainable new jobs:

If you answered "the entrepreneur!" keep reading, if not, go jump in the abyss along with America's present government, because that is where they are headed.

How to get these funds into the hands of entrepreneurs who will create jobs? Some simple suggestions:

1. Tax credits to investors who back new, job-creating companies, with the credit vesting faster/higher for hiring unemployed individuals.

2. Matching funds for entrepreneurs creating new jobs (e.g., for each unemployed person hired and put to work, the government provides 50% of the pay of the next unemployed person hired by that entrepreneur -- about the same funds the government would put into their pocket in unemployment payments).

It is not hard to pull the right levers in America to get growth going again. What has been hard is to get those who know which ones to pull into the right jobs in government.

Psst - entreprenuers and start up companies don't create very many jobs (they tend to be very small), and most fail within a few years.

It is well known economic fact that unemployment benefits directly spur demand since that money will be used to buy food, clothing, gas, etc. Same with infrastructure spending, and the stimulus that kept a lot of local governments running. That is a big part of why unemployment is so stubborn - all those teachers and other civil servants who lost their jobs when the money dried up.

It's sad that people are still trying to promote the BS myth of "job creators" that need tax cuts to create jobs. The economy did quite well with higher taxes in the past, and taxes have NEVER stopped someone from starting a business in the US - if you have a good idea you'll make money and worry about the taxes later.

AND THE REASON CARROT AND STICK Sundays I usually stay relaxed if there is no news but as soon as I switch on the net or TV in comes, we have more problems. I want to be the part of this as I am equally interested in my money where it goes. Stock markets may continue the downslide in near-term amid declining global trend led by euro-zone crisis, say analysts. Analysts feel domestic GDP data, which came at less than expected level has made sentiments jittery and all eyes will now be on the forthcoming monetary policy on June 18. News flow from the euro-zone region will dictate the short-term trend on the domestic bourses, they added. "More downside cannot be ruled out. All eyes will be now on RBI monetary policy on June 18. Global developments will continue to influence the market sentiments US stocks dropped more than two per cent on Friday, with the Dow turning negative for the year for the first time, after poor labour market figures showing a meagre 69,000 jobs were added in May. That combined with dismal data on industry from the US, Europe, China and elsewhere to produce a picture of a sharply slowing global economy. The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed down 274.88 points (2.22 percent) at 12,118.57. Traders expect more volatility in June, with key events scheduled, such as IIP data, inflation number for May and RBI policy. Apart from the domestic situation, Greece's elections on June 17 will be watched very closely, experts said. "For the current month we are expecting the market to remain volatile ahead of major outcome such as Greece Election and RBI .We want define the economic problems of today through the lenses of his politico-economic beliefs, which is the West school. While debt does play part but if one analysed the crux of the issue, the rise of Asia only happened because the few rich folks in Wall Street wanted to get insanely richer by moving the jobs from their own countries to Asia. Why did not Asia innovate and come up with better business ideas instead of becoming the back office of manufacturing and services to the west? There are some problems with this line of thinking. North America and Europe are fundamentally different in terms of immigration. While Europe has strict immigration laws, North America kind of tolerates all and the sundry. Also this myth of Germany becoming competitive by overhauling labour laws and what not is a lot of BS. I have seen Germans work. Though they are a lot more hardworking than perhaps the rest of the European nations, they are far from what the North Americans are. There prosperity depended on technological prowess in the core industries sector which boomed because of the housing bubble, the Euro that came into play and replaced the Deutsche Mark, which gave them, export competitiveness and the weaker European countries that bought from them. the Austrians got to broaden their horizons of thinking ASAP aside from being a shill job for the super duper rich. The United States is not impressed with India's efforts to cut its oil imports from Iran, a top U.S. diplomat said on Tuesday, throwing into doubt whether New Delhi would be given a waiver from U.S. financial sanctions before a June deadline. In short USA is putting all the pressure on all to sanction Trade with Iran while EU bleeds. No patches. The issue has become an irritant in ties between India and the United States. Germany's troubled Left party picked two unknown newcomers at a party congress to try to lead it out of a crisis while spurning a popular eastern pragmatist in a move that may accelerate its demise and hurt Chancellor Angela Merkel's re-election hopes. As a major buyer of Iranian crude, India is crucial to U.S. efforts to squeeze Iran's economy until it agrees to curb its nuclear programme, which the United States and other Western nations suspect is a cover to build atomic weapons. What would you call this? Autonomy? Force? If you do this we will do this? Madam we are looking as the USA employment please do not mix this or cover this up with the Iran issue. The unemployment is in USA and spreading. Why we do not stop that first then we will go to Iran and tell them in 2015, "Please now that you have done your work give us the formulae”. It is so simple for those in the seat to command do this and that while their cat is eating their fish next to their seat. I thank you Firozali A.Mulla DBA

The anonymous Economist blogger continues to drive himself nuts being overly concerned with monthly "noise" instead of observing the trends. Animal spirits as tracked by the TRENDLines Recession Indicator infer USA GDP will rise to 4% by December. There appears no need of further intervention.

I think as President you know you are in trouble when you start saying how little power you have. How things that are going wrong are not your fault or that things are going that are beyond your control. This may very well be true. But its not a good case for getting your re-elected.

Yes but the economy was improving this president was certainly not shy about taking credit for it . Nor for blaming his predecessor for how bad things were when he took over. So he can have it one way but he can't have it both.

America's economic malaise goes much deeper and has for a long time.
No country can live forever on borrowed money. Obama pumped a lot of that stuff into the economy to get it going again, but that can't be done indefinitely. Thank Bush junior, who put the last nail into the coffin with enabling the criminal housing bubble to flourish.

Funny how so many think Bush had complete metaphysical control over every possible facet of the economy, yet now when Obama is President, the belief is that things are complex, and Presidents can only do so much. Which is it?

Maybe reality is that very few saw the impending collapse in 2008, certainly no one in a position to do anything about it.

And also, maybe Presidents, even Bush, have only a tangential effect on the economy in ways that are not evident until long after the fact.

who said things are complex for Obama. Why not have the same patience with Obama, at least Obama never tried to land on a war ship to declare "Mission Accomplished" in a premature fashion while our military and soldiers are still putting their lives in the harms way ! Let us come out of this bias. George W. Bush was born with a silver spoon, yet he brought our great nation to its lowest point in every respect, squandered the budget surplus before anyone saw a red cent. There is no comparison. Whatever you may say, even GW Bush has chosen the quite way to let the people forget his term as president. Bush can only thank OBL and Co. to make him famous! There is no other tangile evidence !

Having "patience" with Obama implies that there is some sort of tangible improvement, an upward trajectory, in the economy since TARP provided liquidity and kept the markets from freezing. This is not the case. The US is stuck, and has been for more than two years.

Plus, the personal attacks on Bush don't move your argument forward. They are not substantive.

"Funny how so many think Bush had complete metaphysical control over every possible facet of the economy, yet now when Obama is President, the belief is that things are complex, and Presidents can only do so much. Which is it? "
Bush junior was part of the problem because he contributed to the 2008 financial implosion with creating and leaving crooked financial laws in place that made the housing bubble possible. What is still unbelievable, out of 300+ million only a few Americans came to the fore, alas with not enough clout, to tell that mentally challenged guy that it is time to stop stoking that criminal activity.

Uh, there has been quite a lot of "tangible" improvement since the bottoming out in 2008/09 - we're adding net jobs, not losing them. The banks aren't about to go belly up.

The collapse in 2008 was incredibly easy to see - I saw it coming in f'ing 2004 for goodness sake (and I don't work in finance or any economics field). All that house flipping, zero down mortgages with artificially low payments the first few years, lax lending requirements, etc... only an idiot wouldn't have seen it coming. Personally, I was surprised the bubble took as long as it did to pop.

Let us import everything from China, let us outsource everything to India and Russia ! So far no political will to slow down this greed to export our jobs ! This is not protectionism. We need to implore our collective will to stop this anhilation of American jobs. As long as we become a importing consumer nation, we will be watching the occasional bumps and again feel disappointed by the illusion of recovery.

Yes, China is very disappointed by their 8% growth and China can only blame us for our sluggish and unpredicatable consumption. We better consume more and import more and outsource more, enjoy more vacations or watch TV or just enjoy longer siesta

By the way, electing Romney is not the solution. We, as people of United States of America, must implore our own conscience and stop our craze for cheap imports ! They are not really cheap given the shoddy quality and very cheap labor in China. It is our big importers and the Chinese party bosses making the big mark ups that disappear into a black-hole somewhere in offshore accounts.
So, capital is really disappearing into these black-holes and we wonder why we cannot sustain the growth !.

Unfortunately it looks like we are on a long future trend of low-growth and fire control. Well, one may argue, we have broken out of the business cycle. Its a shame that it is a steadily declining and deteriorating trajectory without those annoying, but in retrospect comforting, bumps. It may be finally time to take Globalization, which has been a double-edged sword at best and use it to its real advantage - as a global integration tool of increased trade logistics, to start assigning employment focus to countries and regions of that size. But it goes beyond lowering trade barriers, but allowing freer employment movement worldwide, with a plan of which areas would provide which type of industry. Scaling up regions with profitable industries by worldwide investment, allowing worldwide specialists to gather at that location. This of course will break up extended families, dilute national cultures, flatten incomes (not necessarily reduce the overall average), and suppress competition. But unplanned competition is a luxury at a time when worldwide growth prospects are dragging the need to employ, feed, and push technology ahead of material, water, energy, and health shortages. With the current level of complexity, a planned system with all the answers is likely able to outperform the perceived increased work ethic and drive of a purely opportunistic capitalistic system. Further, political boundaries are impeding the process, but a worldwide free-for-all is not the answer either. Nor is a European semi-economic integration of the world's nations by some complex free trade agreement. We need to elevate industries and development to global standards, watched over by a global system, able to move and install itself worldwide wherever it is able to ensure growth. Will this global system be picking 'winners' - possibly. But a planned system with knowledge can mobilize growth unlike the current patchwork. For example, a United Nations' Energy Department to push and develop energy sources worldwide and distribute them with 'fair' control of prices and availability with a panel to settle disagreements with governments. A worldwide employment, energy, and industry plan is a good bet on bringing conflicting and frankly destabilizing environmental, cultural, and political burden to a manageable level. In the same way Dubai drew the world to develop it, so can we create other hot spots that will attract and develop the qualified to get growth moving again. It may mean that the locals will not enjoy the comforting values of past employment opportunities and the community it brought - but this is less important than creating the opportunity for people everywhere to advance in their own skill set and be around others of the same - for that it likely to be a more meaningful community. A return to a re-imagining of the small 'industry'-focussed towns of mid-20th century? - perhaps, but with demand and supply more secured worldwide, success for all is more assured.

Bear in mind that America is still growing at a healthy pace, which is something that its economy hasn't seen in years. You can't possibly expect rapid growth in times of global economic problems. American markets are literally exposed to "outside influences", for instance Europe. I find it rather impressive that its economy has managed to withstand dangers that would have been catastrophic a few years ago. America's stability may be fragile, but it's better than nothing.

You people are obviously punch drunk with drinking the surplus value created by the workers. Too bloated by the fictitious money you have imbibed, you will not see the resulting explossion... so mote it be.
THE PROBLEM IS OVERPRODUCTION YOU MORONS, ARE YOU GONNA KEEP PROMOTING THE BASTARD BANKOCRACY AS A WAY OUT OF THIS ECONOMIC AND MANIFEST SOCIAL CRISIS? "Bailing out" countries now, ha ha ha ha ha ha, oh how I laugh! You ain't got a clue!